↓ Skip to main content

Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 367)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS
Published in
Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10911-018-9415-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaleigh Doke, Shirley Butler, Melissa P. Mitchell

Abstract

Treatment for ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) has historically been extrapolated from studies of invasive breast cancer. Accepted local therapy approaches range from small local excisions, with or without radiation, to bilateral mastectomies. Systemic treatment with endocrine therapy is often recommended for hormone positive patients. With improvements in imaging, pathologic review, and treatment techniques in the modern era, combined with new information regarding tumor biology, the management of DCIS is rapidly evolving. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is now more important than ever, with a shift towards de-escalating therapy to reduce treatment related toxicity. This review focuses on nuances of clinical management of DCIS in the modern era, highlighting key differences between DCIS as compared to invasive breast cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS) currently recommends beginning screening with annual mammograms for women age 45, with the option to start at age 40. As treatment of DCIS has not been shown to impact survival, the USPSTF has more conservative screening recommendations of biennial mammograms from age 50-74. Unlike invasive breast cancer, DCIS is almost exclusively diagnosed by mammographic detection, and lymph node evaluation is not recommended. Pathologic review of biopsy specimens should follow the guidelines of the College of American Pathologists. Surgical management options include breast conservation, mastectomy, or possibly nipple sparing mastectomy, with upfront sentinel lymph node evaluation in the case of mastectomy. Radiation therapy is generally recommended as a component of breast conserving therapy for patients with DCIS, though in some low risk patients, there is trial data to suggest that adjuvant radiation may be omitted. Techniques for minimizing radiation toxicity should always be emphasized. Endocrine therapy is offered to women with hormone positive DCIS who have undergone lumpectomy for risk reduction, and has the benefit of decreasing incidence of events in both the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. More recent studies have explored use of targeted treatments such as trastuzumab in DCIS for HER2 overexpression. Future directions include tailoring therapy based on patient characteristics and tumor biology. With so many different options for treatment, it is also critical to engage in a discussion with the patient to arrive at a treatment decision that balances patient preferences for disease control versus treatment toxicity, financial toxicity, cosmesis, and quality of life.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Other 12 14%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 28 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 34 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,728,729
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia
#25
of 367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,112
of 345,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them